Example of the Post Gazette's anti Pitt and pro PSU coverage bias

[DT_PITT]

Maybe it is just me. However, it turns my stomach when people just bask in the glory days of their youth. That's just ridiculous, IMHO.

For that reason I hate Hall of Fame induction ceremonies and I hate reunions for championship teams. I just think they seem sad.

One night, I was at a fundraiser and I sat next to Rocky Bleier. Turns out Rock, though a bit of an oddball, was also a very nice and thoughtful man.

He was doing what people do at events like that and basically entertaining everyone out the table. He did a fine job with that task.

Finally, when things calmed down, I politely asked him if it was weird to spend so many years of his life talking about such a brief period of his life what happened so many years ago?

I told him I hope he didn't think my question was rude. I was just trying to figure out how annoying it had to be to play professional football in this town – and to have so much success for it – then have to spend every single day for the rest of your life talking reminiscing with stranger after stranger after stranger who thinks they know you but really has no clue?

He smiled and told me that was one of the better questions he had ever gotten in that type of a setting. He asked to think about it for a second and I think he was measuring his words.

In the end, I think he could tell that I was not trying to be rude. I was genuinely interested in understanding how much of a burden that had to be not only for him but for all of the 70s Steelers.

He then acknowledged that it was part of the deal and that it was at times very frustrating. He said that he loved his time in Pittsburgh and would never want to live anywhere else. However, it could be cumbersome when he went to the mall, or to the grocery store, or to the gas station or when he had dinner at a restaurant.

I just smiled and said I have to imagine that is a two-edged sword and he smiled and said that is exactly right.

Then, he made a really good point. He said something to the effect of, "I already played in those games and suffered those injuries and won those championships. I am very proud of all of it. So, while yes, it can be annoying that for so many strangers to come up to me that is the essence of my existence, I would still rather talk about that time in my life than ignore it."

I told him that was the best answer I've ever heard in that type of a setting. I hadn't thought about it in those terms. He just smiled politely and we carried on for the rest of it was a very pleasant evening.

Great story - thanks.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

That was my point. It is always harder for urban program to succeed than it is for a rural program. That is true on any number of fronts.

However, on the media perception front it is especially true. Schools located in or very close to big cities often face the problem of being seen as renegade programs because they cannot control the media the way their rural counterparts are able to do.

Look at the schools that have at one time been considered renegade programs and they're almost always in major cities. I am talking about schools like Miami, UNLV, USC, Washington, Tulane, Louisville, SMU, Houston, etc.

That is because it is so much easier for the media to infiltrate those schools than it would be for them to get into a more remote school like Notre Dame or Penn State or Texas A&M or any of the other 10,000 schools just like that. The schools tend to control the media that cover them because they are located in places where they are the only real game in town. They are company towns and the company is "Big State U."

Personally, I think SMU got what it deserved. They were brazenly cheating and they would not stop. The sitting governor of Texas was involved in their cheating scandal for god's sake! Believe me when I tell you that I do not shed any tears for the Mustangs, per se.

However, my point is that they were far from alone. That whole conference was cheating and they were just one of eight or nine schools doing basically the same thing. In fact, I think that documentary made the point that every single team in the Southwest Conference was on probation at one point during the 1980s - every single one of them.

For SMU to have been singled out as the lone wolf is completely ridiculous.

Cynically, I think the NCAA knew that it had a major problem in that conference and really throughout college football. So, they decided to shoot a hostage and SMU just represented the easiest pickings possible.

Doc, a perfect example of this is UNC. How in the name of the NCAA have they avoided any serious punishment? Their brazen violations are repeated and are at the very corp of the rule book.

That being said, the silence on Miami has all been deafening.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

As for the 30/30 stories, I think they are mostly well done, but some have definitive narrative that focused on a small part of the issue, instead of the big picture (ie the Big East). As Doc said, the retrospect on how cool those Gtown/Syracuse/St Johns/Nova games with larger than life coaches was great, a fantastic trip down memory lane.

But the central issues and circumstances that eventually led to the demise of the Big East were really never broached. We need to remember a lot of these were made by real like Hollywood directors so like Hollywood typically does, they do their own spin on things.

 

[Pghfan]

think you guys are missing the idea of a documentary.. These aren't investigative reporting stories by 60 minutes.. Your guys' complaints on this would be like me complaining about the movie Titanic covering the romance between jack and "whatever her name was" and not more on the errors made by the capt to avoid the iceberg.. It's not a news story, it is a movie some guy made to entertain us.. A documentary called "The U" is probably gonna be a fluff piece, not a "behind the scenes" account.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

You are obviously, right, PGH. It was definitely a fan-fiction piece. That was my point all along.

What made the SMU documentary infinitely more interesting is that it had no rah-rah element to it. Instead it was a legitimate examination of what happened there and why. It also did a very good job of putting the scandal into proper context.

I learned some things during that doc that I did not already know and which forced me to reexamine how I looked at that entire situation. That made it worth my time.

"The U" was quite different. It was very douchey and very cheesy. It was also completely revisionist and dishonest.

I don't need a 60 Minutes-style expose. However, I also don't need college football's answer to "Titanic" either.

I'm sorry but I thought the documentary on Miami sucked. The one on SMU was so much better it is not even funny. I think there have been some magnificent 30 for 30s but the fanboy ones typically just plain suck.

 

[deepelemblues]

I would've loved to of heard his side of the story and why he felt he needed to be so strict

I think you named the reasons yourself - guns, blow and "No" not existing in the players' vocabulary when it came to women. The players seemed to think they were acting out Scarface in real life, except this time no Bolivian kill squad shooting everyone at the end. Which they somehow did avoid (barely).

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Right, so I can see why a 19-year-old would feel that way about the old stick in the mud Dean who making everyone obey the rules - at least on occasion.

What is less clear as why all of the now middle-aged men can't see it through an adult prism?

I will let it go now as I have obviously made my point. The U missed all kinds of opportunities to tell an interesting story and instead settled for something easy and cheesy and that is a shame. They had an opportunity to create a lasting piece and instead opted for yet another cheeseball recruiting video.

 

[deepelemblues]

What is less clear as why all of the now middle-aged men can't see it through an adult prism?

Certain middle-aged men are either jealous or extremely nostalgic about the days when they were running wild or wished they had been running wild.

Also it'd be good for ESPN if The U became The U again.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

No offense, but a lot of good discussion on ESPN 30 for 30, and again the PG skates free from criticism.

 

[Pghfan]

Certain middle-aged men are either jealous or extremely nostalgic about the days when they were running wild or wished they had been running wild.

Also it'd be good for ESPN if The U became The U again.

It would be good for the ACC.. I honestly don't think Miami can be a power team unless they somehow, go back to The U.. I don't know to the levels it was but get a rogue coach, and embrace that again. What they are doing now, isn't working. Some birds weren't meant to be caged..

 

[daminals76]

I think the PG does a great job covering all three local teams. Looking at it objectively, there is no bias or conspiracy theories.
I'll continue to buy and support the Post Gazette!

 

[Pghfan]

not a fan of the PPG but Werner has done a good job this camp.. Kudos to him..

 

[OriginalEther]

not a fan of the PPG but Werner has done a good job this camp.. Kudos to him..

Yeah, that's were I think he does his best work.
It does seem that it's rubbed off on DiPola, who appears to be giving far more camp updates himself than it the past.

I think the PG does a great job covering all three local teams. Looking at it objectively, there is no bias or conspiracy theories.

Um, have you been reading this thread?
Look, I don't live in Pittsburgh, so I can't buy the paper even if I wanted to, and I'll only check it out for Pitt articles when the beat writer is being particularly active (like right now); so most of my feedback on the paper comes from posters on this site.

But when a news story that makes Penn State look bad (Jay's letters) gets picked up by national outlets, but not the "home" paper, it kind of tells you something, especially when they'll gladly print a story on how James Franklin once helped an old lady cross the street.

My personal anecdote was in 2005, when PSU rallied to beat Northwestern. They get a big headline on Page 1 of the sports proclaiming it as some great, heroic comeback, when everyone knows if Pitt had to mount a comeback to beat a team like Northwestern, it would be mocked and Smizik/Cook when give us a column telling us not to expect much for the season. Pitt, BTW, was relegated to the corner for their game.

 

[pittjagger]

Speaking of the PG, excellent story on Reggie Mitchell today. Worth the read

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/...ming-a-leader-on-defense/stories/201508210180

 

[Pitt is #1]

I don't think realistically anyone can claim there is a lack of coverage by the local media. It's the difference in the prism of light these programs are portrayed in.

 

[vinniep33]

One final thought on the 30/30 series.

In general, I really like them. However, some of them are just so incredibly poorly done that it ruins it for me.

Another good example of that was the documentary they did on the Big East.

Has any Pitt fan knows, there were a ton of issues surrounding that conference from its inception until its ultimate demise and rebirth.

Those issues have really been at the center of college athletics for most of the past 30 years and have helped drive conference realignment - THE MAJOR story in college athletics during ESPN's epoch.

To skip over all of those admittedly esoteric and complex issues so that you could spent two hours talking about how cool the Georgetown/Syracuse games were in the 80s was such a breathtaking mistake.

There is no question that the Big East Tournaments of the 1980s should've been featured prominently in any documentary about the league. That is what defined that league on a national stage.

However, there should've been a lot of talk about football and the stress it put on the league. There should've been some discussion about the inherent conflict that existed between all of the small, private, "basketball schools" and their larger, more well-heeled, mostly public "football school" partners.

Also, there should've been a lot of discussion about the ACCs 2003 raid and the Big East's subsequent expansion. That was the key time in that conference's existence and it is ultimately what ruined it. I would have loved to have heard varying perspectives on that period and what ultimately led to the league's dissolution.

Sometimes I think I'm just in the wrong demographic. I am an adult who would like to learn some of the behind the scenes decision making that shaped our current landscape. Entities like ESPN want no part of pulling back the curtain. They would rather still sneakers to 12-year-old kids who don't know about history and who really don't care about that either. The kids just know that the Fab Five introduced long gym shorts to college basketball and they might want to buy them.

Boring.

Curmudgeon. Lol

 

[daminals76]

I don't think realistically anyone can claim there is a lack of coverage by the local media. It's the difference in the prism of light these programs are portrayed in.

Im not sure what you expect? The local media isn't going to treat Pitt like they are Alabama, or Ohio State...

 

[bwh05]

Im not sure what you expect? The local media isn't going to treat Pitt like they are Alabama, or Ohio State...

No one expects preferential treatment for Pitt but I would at least like equal treatment for all 3 programs. You can't be fair and balanced with Pitt then decide you're going to spare PSU & WVU any negative coverage, especially with PSU's recent situation.

 

[Pitt is #1]

Im not sure what you expect? The local media isn't going to treat Pitt like they are Alabama, or Ohio State...

No kidding...Pitt deserves some criticism...but so does a school that covers up child rape...spends excessive amounts on football and doesn't win much more than a school who has little interest in fielding a successful team. I'm sorry you can't defend their inability to be objective.

 

[daminals76]

No kidding...Pitt deserves some criticism...but so does a school that covers up child rape...spends excessive amounts on football and doesn't win much more than a school who has little interest in fielding a successful team. I'm sorry you can't defend their inability to be objective.

The PSU scandal was years ago. Its beyond time to let it go already.

 

[Pitt is #1]

Dude I'm beyond it...my point is the local media virtually ignored it. Yet we got a ton of attention for a 20 year old driving after drinking one beer. Feel free to hold your opinion regardless of how incorrect you are.

 

[daminals76]

Dude I'm beyond it...my point is the local media virtually ignored it. Yet we got a ton of attention for a 20 year old driving after drinking one beer. Feel free to hold your opinion regardless of how incorrect you are.

You're totally right. The post gazette is completely bias against Pitt. I'm really sure that is in their best interest here in PITTSburgh!

If you seriously think the PG "virtually ignored" the Sandusky thing then I don't know what to tell you. I saw several stories about it?

You don't even realize how completely idiotic this whole thread is.